Long term review: The Carl Zeiss ZF.2 2/28 Distagon T*

_5100_DSC1460 copy
A cinematic lens needs a cinematic product shot.

I’ve been lucky enough to own and use a lot of lenses in my time. And some of them pretty exceptional – off the top of my head, there’s the Nikon 200/2; the Leica 50/0.95 Noctilux-M ASPH; the Leica 21/1.4 Summilux-M ASPH; the Leica 35/1.4 ASPH FLE (you can probably see where this is going); the Leica 50/2 APO; the Nikon 85/1.4 G; the Zeiss ZF 2/100 Makro Planar; the Nikon 85/2.8 PCE…suffice to say, it would be difficult to pick one as an outright favorite. But I think if there ever was a contender, then it’d be the Zeiss ZF.2 2/28 Distagon T*.

_5100_DSC1424bw copy

Firstly, it’s not a technically perfect lens by any stretch of the imagination. In fact, it tends to score quite lowly on common testing metrics – especially in the corners – because its defining signature is highly pronounced field curvature. Imagine a ball around the camera; the plane of focus for this lens follows the surface of that sphere. It lends a very unique rendition to subjects shot with it because it has the property of emphasizing the out of focus areas by making them effectively further away from the camera. This, in turn, results in greater separation between the subject and background – it’s not always obvious, but if you shoot the same scene with a relatively flat-field lens like the Nikon 24/1.4, you can instantly see the difference.

_5100_DSC1558 copy
Proper DOF scales, but they’re too short.

This property makes for great bokeh and a very cinematic rendering. In fact, the earlier Contax/ Yashica mount version of the lens is known as the ‘Hollywood Distagon’ for its huge popularity amongst filmmakers for use in indoor scenes; I wouldn’t be surprised if the majority of these lenses landed up being converted to some cinema mount. As far as I can tell from their block diagrams, the ZF and ZF.2 versions are almost (if not exactly) identical optically, with some minor updates to coatings and the like – as well as a different mount, of course.

_7022462 copy
Dessert. Nikon D700, ZF2 2/28

On axis, there’s plenty of sharpness at every aperture. You cannot focus and recompose with this lens; use either live view or AF assist to focus edge subjects, else they will be out of focus. f4 seems to be the optimal aperture, but frankly there’s not a lot of difference from wide open. However, you’ll need at least f5.6 on full frame before your depth of field covers the effects of field curvature completely. Similarly, the lens vignettes noticeably at f2 – perhaps 1-1.5 stops in the corners – which almost disappears by f5.6. All of this adds to the flavor.

_7013522 copy
Fire. Nikon D700, ZF2 2/28

The one optical quality that isn’t so hot is a propensity for purple fringing on bright contrast edges, especially noticeable around in-focus backlit subjects; it goes away with stopping down. It doesn’t look like CA, which makes me suspect that it’s an odd interaction of the older lens design with digital sensors. For most subjects, it’s fairly easy to correct by masking out the affected area and desaturating the magenta channel. There is some slight CA in the corners, but it’s almost completely gone by f4. Thanks to the excellent coating, flare is almost entirely absent – point the lens into any light source you wish, just watch your eyes. It’s a great lens for shooting contra-jour; what little flare does show (if the angle is just right) is mild and cinematic.

_7023450 copy
That’s the most flare I’ve ever been able to get out of this lens. Nikon D700, ZF2 2/28

The ZF 28 has a rounded-polygon aperture with 9 blades; it isn’t perfectly circular, but I can’t complain about the bokeh – it’s absolutely beautiful, and renders even complex backgrounds in a pleasingly melted fashion. There are very slight highlight fringes on out of focus point sources, but the transition is fairly gentle so it’s not at all distracting.

_7004487 copy
All about the bokeh. Nikon D700, ZF2 2/28

I find that the Zeiss ZF lenses seem to fall into two camps – there’s those with a very ‘crisp’ rendition, like the 2.8/21 Distagon, the 2/50 Makro-Planar and the 2/100 Makro-Planar, and those with a softer rendition, like the 1.4/50 Planar and 1.5/85 Planar. The 2/28 seems to straddle those two camps – it has higher contrast than the latter group, but not quite as much punch as the former. I personally find it very pleasing.

_7004875bw copy
Waiting. The 28 Distagon’s excellent tonal separation makes for great B&W conversions, too. Nikon D700, ZF2 2/28

Like all Zeiss lenses, microcontrast is excellent thanks to the T* coating. Speaking of coatings, the first few elements of the lens actually seem to disappear when you look into the front – this speaks volumes about little light loss there is going on inside the optics. This translates into excellent light transmission – T2.1, in fact. (It’s the same lens optically as the Zeiss CP.2 T2.1/28, but with different focus gearing and a much smaller price tag.)

_7021599 copy
Kitchen portrait. Nikon D700, ZF2 2/28

Being a manual focus lens, you’re probably wondering how practical it is for regular photography – the answer is that it’s not too bad, but you’ll definitely see the benefit in having a split prism or similar screen installed. All modern DSLRs have focusing screens with a narrow scatter angle that are optimized for brightness with slow zooms rather than focusing snap; in fact, it’s a slow change that’s been ongoing since the beginnings of autofocus.

_3100_DSC0067 copy
Untitled, Nikon D3100, ZF2 2/28

You’ll probably find it nearly impossible to focus with an entry level APS-C DSLR; their focusing screens don’t have anywhere near enough magnification or ‘snap’ to make life easy. Although you can use the focusing aids – the green dot and arrows for Nikon users, or the beep for Canon shooters – depth of field with the 28 Distagon is shallow enough that you need to take care, because there’s a bit of range in the focus ring position for which the dot will stay lit or the beep will sound. And the extreme ends of that range will be clearly out of focus if the lens is shot wide open. You could stop down and use the DOF scales, of course, but the focus ring throw is a bit too short and the DOF scales too incomplete for that.

_7022547 copy
Coffee time. Nikon D700, ZF2 2/28

One nice feature is that the lens focuses very close indeed – 25cm from the sensor plane – for some interesting closeup angles. Optical performance remains consistently excellent even at this focusing distance.

You’ll notice I haven’t said much about construction – that’s a good thing. Use any of the ZF or ZE lenses (optics are of course the same) and you’re in for a treat. They’re solid, fully metal (anodized aluminum barrels, I believe) with chromed brass mounts and buttery smooth focus throws; just enough resistance not to move or be nudged, but with a really nice tactile feel that reminds me of a well-damped heavy piston moving through oil, or something similar. For want of a better analogy, the lenses feel like scientific instruments. On the ZF.2 versions, there’s an aperture ring that locks at f22 for electronic control on modern Nikons. The ZF version has ‘rabbit ears’ for coupling with earlier cameras’ metering pins. And the ZE version is fully electronic with no aperture ring at all.

_7024569 copy
Stair #173. Nikon D700, Zeiss ZF2 2/28

There are a few areas for improvement, though – while the hood bayonet mechanism is beautifully made and locks with a nice positive detent, the hood itself is easily dinged and scratched on the rim if bumped into something. A rubber lip would be nice. And the velvet flocking on the inside of the hood might be great at preventing stray light and flare, but it’s also very good at picking up dirt (especially light-colored dirt) and seems to peel off the metal quite easily. To be honest, I land up not using mine a lot of they time because I’m particular enough to like to keep my equipment pristine. Finally, the lens caps need help – there’s not enough thread on the edges to keep them securely gripping the filter ring; the springs aren’t strong enough to keep the caps from moving if bumped; and they’re impossible to remove if the hood is attached. I’ve replaced all of my Zeiss caps with Nikon ones.

_7013841 copy
Mt. Yotei wears a hat. Nikon D700, ZF2 2/28

If you think I’m gushing about this lens, it’s solely because of the pictorial results I get from it justify it. To my eyes, they have a special quality that I rarely see, and just makes images that pop – with saturated, slightly warm colors, great microcontrast separation, and a very three-dimensional rendering. And the enjoyable tactility of the thing as an object doesn’t do any harm, either. Frankly, if they did an M-mount version with thes same optical formula – size be damned – this would be permanently welded to my M9-P.

_7008766 copy
Perbadanan Putrajaya. (Vignetting added). Nikon D700, ZF2 2/28

How does it compare to the other 28s or 28 equivalents I’ve used? This is an interesting question, because the new Nikon AFS 28/1.8 G (which I recently reviewed here) seems to actually have a lot of the same optical properties as the Zeiss – field curvature, great central sharpness, smooth bokeh, high transmission – and most usefully, autofocus. Honestly, I think the Nikon comes very close; however, the one missing ingredient is microcontrast – it just doesn’t pop in the same way as the Zeiss. Color saturation is a little lower, too. I’ve come to the conclusion that if I’m running and gunning, I’ll take the Nikon, but if I’ve got time to craft the image, then it’s the Zeiss all the way. I don’t think any of the other Nikon mount 28s are in the running, even the legendary f1.4; admittedly, it’s been a long time since I’ve used one. Both lenses have some distortion, which would probably render them unsuitable for architectural work without correction; I think they make much better contextual documentary lenses anyway.

_7012699 copy
Train driver. Nikon D700, ZF2 2/28

I admit I’m a bit of a 28mm FOV junkie, so I’ve tried many lenses on different mounts and formats; in my mind, the two interesting competitors are the Leica 21/1.4 Summilux-M ASPH and Zeiss ZM 2.8/21 Biogon, both on the 1.3x crop Leica M8 rangefinder. The former is the only wide I’ve ever used that gives the same sort of subject separation as a telephoto; the latter has similar 3D qualities to the ZF 2/28, and in fact reminds me quite a bit of the ZF 2.8/21 Distagon, too. Unfortunately, I haven’t had a chance to evaluate the Leica 28/2 Summilux ASPH in any great detail, and the Leica 28/2.8 ASPH is very sharp, but a little characterless. The ZM 2.8/28 is a very competent lens, but missing that little something I can’t quite put my finger on.

_7009842 copy
Riding the big yellow snake. Nikon D700, ZF2 2/28

I don’t say this lightly, but despite its optical imperfections, the ZF.2 2/28 Distagon joins my personal pantheon of great lenses – if you’re a fan of cinematic rendering and the 28mm FOV, then this is the lens for you. It positively shines on full frame, but will do well on APS-C cameras too – if you can focus it reliably. Now, if only they’d make an autofocus version…MT

Note: some of you may be wondering why none of the images from this review were shot with the D800E; the honest answer is because I haven’t had a chance yet. However, my initial testing shows that the lens continues to perform as expected and without issue on the higher-resolution sensor.

Addendum: If you’re a Canon shooter, I actually recommend buying the Nikon (ZF/ZF.2) versions if you have a mirrorless cameras as well – you can then use this lens on the CSC with an adaptor, and retain full aperture control. This isn’t possible with the Canon version as the diaphragm is activated electronically.

Both versions of the lens are available here from B&H or Amazon.

____________

Visit our Teaching Store to up your photographic game – including Photoshop Workflow DVDs and customized Email School of Photography; or go mobile with the Photography Compendium for iPad. You can also get your gear from B&H and Amazon. Prices are the same as normal, however a small portion of your purchase value is referred back to me. Thanks!

Don’t forget to like us on Facebook and join the reader Flickr group!

appstorebadge

Images and content copyright Ming Thein | mingthein.com 2012 onwards. All rights reserved

_7004405bw copy

Roots. Nikon D700, ZF2 2/28

Comments

  1. Hey Ming, so what 28mm (or equivalent focal length) would you recommend for the m mount? Ive been looking at the Zeiss 28mm f/2.8 ZM though I read somewhere that you didnt think that lens had much going for it.

  2. Hi Ming,

    Older post, I know….

    Wondering if you (or any readers) have anything to say regarding the Zeiss 35mm 2.0 in terms of how it compares technically and aesthetically to the 28mm? I got my hands on a veeery well priced (but still alot for me really) 35mm for my D600 and am just wondering what an articulate and knowledgeable bloke like yourself has to say on the matter?

    I guess I mean does the huge praise for the 28mm and its ‘Hollywood-ness’ so to speak, carry over to the 35mm?

    • Both are excellent lenses, but the 35 is a bit more ‘conventional’ in rendering – not so much field curvature, a little sharper, still good but missing a bit of the magic. I had one and sold it – partially because I didn’t get along with the 35mm FOV, partially because I prefer the 28’s rendering style.

      • Thank you kindly for your prompt reply mate.

        On a related note – do you have a post anywhere regarding what you have done to setup your Nikon FX bodies for MF glass? I have seen references to the pains you have gone through for this and would love to know more, as my real interested is in MF glass.

        Cheers

  3. Hi, this is a great review and it pushes me to buy one. Would you still recommend this lens on D800. Or should I go for Nikon version?

  4. Loving the results from this lens. Upsettingly I found the review search for ZM 28/2.8 results. I got very excited until I saw it was a ZF :( I use a M9 + D800 so like you enjoy nice lenses. My fav D800 lenses are the 200/2 and 50/1.2 for sure. Plenty of examples on my blog if interested. I’m now almost 2 feet in the Leica camp so just go the 50/1.4 Lux ASPH + 50/2 Cron to compare to my Voigtlander and Zeiss glass. I’m looking for a 28mm with rendering as you found with the ZF to maybe replace my 28/2 Ultron.

    Nice post, cheers

    • I had the 2.8/28 ZM, didn’t like it very much. Reasonably sharp, but lacking ‘bite’ and 3D feel – couldn’t put my finger on exactly why, though. All I know is that I didn’t use it much and sold it shortly thereafter.

  5. What’s wrong about focusing and recomposing with *this* lens? I have it and find it precisely possible to do *because* of field curvature, because all points equidistant to the camera are in focus, so it’s possible to focus and recompose. It’s *not* possible to focus and recompose with a Planar lens …

  6. Sergey Landesman says:

    Hi Ming!
    Can one use this lens on Micro 4/3d cameras with an adapter?

  7. Great review and pics as always Ming. Tell me, is the M-mount version of this lens very inferior, as I was considering this lens or the 21mm zeiss (haven’t quite decided which is my preferred fov and I can’t get both) over the leica lens options.

    • Completely different optical design – the SLR mount versions are telecentric Distagons, the M mount is a symmetric Biogon – and actually, the M mount version is even better…I used to shoot it a lot when I had an M8.

      • Thanks for the feedback Ming. I must have mis-interpreted your review where you said “Frankly, if they did an M-mount version with thes same optical formula – size be damned – this would be permanently welded to my M9-P.” I thought that to mean that it (the M-mount version) was optically or character-wise inferior.
        Ps. How did you find Niseko/surrounds in summer? We were just there for some Spring skiing with a snow covered Mt Yotei! Great location and locals.

        • The M wides are Biogons, the SLR wides are Distagons. Different optics. The 2/28 Distagon has a much nice rendering than the 2.8/28 Biogon; but the 2.8/21 Biogon is a bit better than the 2.8/21 Distagon (though both 21s are outstanding). Niseko is nice in the summer, though very hot/ humid; not a lot to do other than take walks and enjoy the nature and hot springs.

  8. Jorge Balarin says:

    Dear Ming, I would like to buy the Carl Zeiss ZF.2 2.8/21 Distagon, to use it with my D700. Do you think I would have the same manual focus problem that Michael Gannon is having with his D800 and the Zeiss ZF.2 2/28 Distagon ? And if I have the same problem, wich alternatives I would have to solve it ? Thanks and greetings, Jorge.

    • Hard to say, it depends on your camera. My D700 didn’t manual focus well at all for the same reasons; I modified it with a custom-cut focusing screen from an F6 and both shimmed the focusing screen and adjusted the mirror zero position. Fast wides are trickier because the fall off in the focal plane is a lot more gradual than for longer lenses. When I use the 21 on my D800E, I have to rely on the focus confirmation dot or use live view. You do of course have the same option of having the mirror properly calibrated, as well as getting a better focusing screen – the D800 has the largest focusing screen put into any Nikon, which means that you cannot cut down something else to fit – but you can with the D700, and I believe there are some aftermarket options – but I haven’t personally tried them.

  9. Michael Gannon says:

    This is such a fantastic review I took the plunge and bought the ZF.2 2/28 Distagon, my first non AF lens in many years, to put on a D800. Now I find I’m incapable of the amazingly sharp images you show because I can’t focus. Using the confirmation dot in the viewfinder results in blurry shots. A review of postings elsewhere suggests that many people are also having this issue so I was hoping you might have some suggestions. It doesn’t appear that there are focusing screens for the D800 (at least I haven’t found any). Can you recommend a shooting technique?

    • Chances are it isn’t your eyes – the D800’s focusing screen isn’t the snappiest I’ve encountered – it’s probably your mirror alignment being off. Every single AF DSLR I’ve owned has arrived with poor mirror alignment; this means the effective distance from lens flange to sensor isn’t the same as flange to focusing screen, resulting in misfocused shots. The camera makers simply don’t bother with good viewfinders anymore since most people use AF. Try a clean F2 with a J screen and you’ll see exactly what I mean by focusing snap and alignment…the F2T I recently bought still has perfect mirror alignment after 30 years.

      • Michael Gannon says:

        Ming, what’s the solution? Or is there one? I want to try to make it work with this lens but its expensive and I can’t get reliable shots. Can the problem be fixed by fine tuning AF? Any else?

        • AF fine tune has no effect on manual focus or the point at which the dot kicks in. You can have the mirror aligned, but you’ll need to send it in to Nikon and explain what you want done because manual focus is off. Possible to DIY but it can be fiddly, and it’s very easy to scratch or damage the mirror or AF submirror.

  10. Bought one second hand mint condition recently, will test it once I got my camera back, preliminary testing this lens with D800E, the sharpness improve significantly when shot with live view mode.

    • Absolutely – I use LV whenever I’m in studio now. The only problem is that it previews the shooting exposure, not a visible exposure – utterly useless if you’re exposure is 100% flash – say 1/250s and f16…

  11. Jorge Balarin says:

    Hi Ming, I have a question, do you know why Zeiss is not doing DSRL autofocus lenses ? Greetings. Jorge.

  12. I love this kind of review, one that focuses on real-world image quality and artistic potential rather than a slavish fixation on metrics and test charts. I’m very tempted to get one of these for my OM-D. How much of the magic is retained when used with an adapter on an M43 body? Do you have any samples, by chance?

    • Thanks Kerim. You still get the color and wonderful microcontrast, but not so much of the 3D effect because the central portion of the frame is mostly free of field curvature. I don’t have anything I’d be happy sharing, it’s mostly just informal test shots to determine if the combination was useable or not.

  13. Wayne S says:

    Nice images and review of the zf 28!
    I think you should try the zf 25/2 too.
    I have rented it and shot it on my 1ds3 against my ze 21/2.8 and 24G/1.4.
    I prefer the 21 over the other two for landscapes.
    But for cityscapes and low light I like the 25/2 and 24G/1.4.
    The 25/2 has great color and very low if any CA. It does render extreme corners blurry at infinite focus but this may not bother you.
    Since I already have and love the 24G/1.4 which I like to shoot wide open alot and lime it’s extra ability to isolate subject from background I am not sure if I will want to ever get the 25/2. I also found the 25/2 to be more contrastierror than the 24G which tended to cause the shadows to go much darker if wanted to keep the highlights from clipping when taking low light night street shots.
    Now that I have a D800E, I know have AF capabilities for the 24G if I want.
    Still have to perform the left AF point tests.

    • Thanks. I’m trying to get hold of one to review, but I already have the ZF 21 also, so there isn’t much point in bunching the focal lengths so close together. (There will be a review of that lens coming soon too, once I have a chance to write it.)

  14. As always, amazing shots. What I would love to see, is a side by side shots with of the ZF.2 2/28 and the Nikon AFS 28/1.8. I am having a hard time understanding what you mean by micro contrast, and I think a direct comparison with similar subjects would help. Is that something you think you might be able to do? I am definitely in the market for the AFS 28/1.8, but with the D800 I manual focus most of the time when the subject is not trying to get away from me (e.g. nieces and nephews), so would be interested in the direct image comparison.

    • +1, would love to see micro contrast comparison between Distagon and Nikon AF-S 1.8g

    • Thanks Andrew. I could set up A-B test shots of static objects, but it’s not very instructive because that’s not what we use these lenses for in the real world; unfortunately real world reportage subjects tend not to give you enough time to change lenses for a do over.

      I do plan to do an article on microcontrast once I figure out an easy way of explaining it…

  15. Matt in Missouri says:

    Thanks for the review, and the shots. I like them all, but I’m especially fond of the Stair #173 and untitled photograph (clever composition).

    Count me as another fan of the Zeiss ZF.2 2/25. Everything Kristian states above applies to my opinion of that lens. I’m convinced, however, based on your comments that I need to check out the Zeiss 2/28 before settling in on this approximate focal range. (I’ll give the new Nikon 28/1.8 a look, too—hard not to at that price.)

    As much as I love the Zeiss ZF.2 2.8/21, I’m now finally convinced I’m just no good that wide. I sheepishly admit that the difficulty I personally have achieving results at that focal length, at least to the degree that I am approaching something satisfactory, is both a reason to keep plugging away and a reason to call it a day and move on. At the end of the day this woeful novice has decided to move on, if temporarily, to the 25mm-28mm range.

    • I think the difficulty in using wides well is that the perspective just isn’t human-scale – i.e. we can’t relate to it so easily because that isn’t the way our eyes see. I think 28 is ‘wide natural’ for us, and about 85 is ‘wide normal’.

  16. Isn’t the CP.2 a 2.9 version?

  17. I used to own this lens and it draws beautifully. But the biggest problem with it is the fact it’s aperture opening is more like a 2.8. Compared to the Nikkor 28/1.4 at f/2, the Nikkor let in a extra stop of light. That alone turned me away. Now I have the 25/2 and it is a perfect lens, minus the field curvatuire. The 25mm is a proper f/2, is much sharper wide open, has less distortion (compared to other 24mm lenses), is pretty much flare resistant and is more like a 26mm than a 25mm. I can’t stress enough how good this lens is. not sure if you’ve used it Ming but it’s gonna knock your socks off!

    • Oh and I forgot to mention it has virtually zero CA and fringing. The only thing that stops it receiving the praise of the 21mm is the fact that it isn’t a flat field lens, but thats not the purpose of this lens.

    • You sure about that? The CP.2 version is T2.1, and has the same optical formula and coatings. The 25 sounds good but not a focal length that I like that much, to be honest. As for the Nikon 28/1.4 – the one I used some time ago wasn’t that stellar wide open, and they’re impossible to find to boot…

      • I’ve very sure. I’ve never been a 25/24 guys myself but somehow found myself attracted to this lens. The effective focal length feeling closer to a 28mm than a 24mm convinced me. I just tried my friend’s 28/1.4 on my D800E and found it to be sharp enough wide open with beautiful rendering. Previously I wasn’t so convinced myself when I owned it previously. Either way the new 25 has had plenty of time to be perfected, and the 28 is still a great lens if you can overlook the exposure shortcoming wide open.

  18. Wow – love your coffee time shot, and also the one of your dad! Hmmm now if I only could afford a D700 and some of those Zeiss lenses…

  19. Ming, with all the great gear that you review and all the gorgeous images, your blog is like a camera porn site — and I mean that in a good way! LOL. Is that your father “Waiting” in the b&w photo? There’s a resemblance.

  20. Great review. I have this same lens on my Canon 5D MarkII and i count it as the best lens in my arsenal. Makes me want to use the Canon eventhough i take a majority of my photos with a OM-D these days.

Trackbacks

  1. […] lenses geared at maximum image quality: this meant all Zeiss primes (2/21 Distagon for interiors, 2/28 Distagon, 1.4/55 Otus APO Distagon, 2/135 APO Sonnar) and Nikon PCE lenses. My subjects don’t move and […]

  2. […] Zeiss ZF.2 2/28 Distagon In short: I didn’t land up using or carrying it because I had the GR with me, and that was just easier to carry, deploy and use off a belt holster than playing musical lenses (especially not in some of the very dusty or sea-sparayed conditions we encountered). I’d leave this behind next time. […]

  3. […] charts and numbers are not everything. There are lenses that test very poorly – Zeiss’ own 2/28 Distagon is one of those – due to aberrations such as severe field curvature; however, in practice, the […]

  4. […] this assignment, I packed a range of gear (D800E, D600, Zeiss ZF.2 2.8/21, Zeiss ZF.2 2/28, Zeiss ZF.2 2/100, Nikon AFS 24-120/4 VR, OM-D and Panasonic 100-300, and of course the Gitzo […]

  5. […] Amazon Nikon AFS 200/2 VR II N – B&H Amazon Zeiss ZF.2 2/28 Distagon** 9/10 – review B&H Amazon Zeiss ZF.2 2/35 Distagon** 8/10 – B&H Amazon Zeiss ZF.2 2/50 Makro […]

  6. [...] I think there’s some very slight field curvature to the design that does the same thing the Zeiss ZF.2 2/28 Distagon does at the edges. Tough to focus without the magnification on, but you get used to it after a [...]

  7. [...] for the more telecentric designs such as the Zeiss Distagons. I tested the Zeiss ZF.2 2.8/21 and 2/28 Distagons with no issues; the 2/50 and 2/100 Makro-Planars were also excellent performers. Out of [...]

  8. [...] of 28mm lenses and 28mm equivalents; the two I currently own – the Nikon AFS 28/1.8G and Zeiss ZF.2 2/28 Distagon are reviewed on their respective links, too. Aside from that, I’ve also got the Zeiss ZM [...]

  9. [...] ZD 12/2, ZD 45/1.8, ZD 60/2.8 Macro Panasonic 20/1.7, 100-300/4-5.6 Zeiss ZF.2 2.8/21 Distagon; ZF.2 2/28 Distagon; ZF.2 2/50 Makro-Planar; ZF.2 2/100 Makro-Planar; ZM 2.8/28 Biogon; ZM 2/50 [...]

  10. [...] trying out some macro work without the Visoflex and bellows, and finally, putting my favourite Zeiss ZF.2 2/28 Distagon on the front in a useable way thanks to a Nikon F-Leica M adaptor I’ve had lying around for [...]

  11. [...] And some of them pretty exceptional – off the top of my head, there's the Nikon 200/2; the Leica 50/0.95 Noctilux-M ASPH; the Leica 21/1.4 Summilux-M ASPH; the Leica 35/1.4 ASPH FLE (you can probably see where this is …  [...]

Thoughts? Leave a comment here and I'll get back to you.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 27,532 other followers

%d bloggers like this: